Tainted Scholar?

[Drakevarg]

I recently got my hands on a copy of Heroes of Horror, which has been quite an interesting read. However, I seem to recall Tainted Scholar being commonly brought up in CharOp threads as being annoyingly broken and indeed when I scrounged up a list of PrC Tier modifiers it listed the Tainted Scholar at a +2. What it neglected to do, however, is explain what exactly was broken about it.

So naturally I came to you fine folks to explain what was up. What is it about this thing that makes my subconscious want to light anyone who tries using it on fire?

[tyckspoon]

You substitute your Corruption and Depravity scores for your casting stat. If you're still alive, that means your effective casting stats can merely be very high; you can have taint scores in the 50 range and still have 10+ points of cushion against unintended taint gains. If you're undead or have the (Evil) subtype, you suffer no ill effect from taint, and your casting stat can be as high as you want subject to the amount of time you have to spend chilling around in a tainted area.

[Safety Sword]

I'll just leave this (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=215307) here.

Edit: It was still on the front page and everything :P

[dextercorvia]

Here is another thread on the first page about this very issue (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=215307). Well at least until they started talking about LA and Walker in the Wastes.

Edit: The Ninjas, they are everywhere.

[Safety Sword]

Here is another thread on the first page about this very issue (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=215307). Well at least until they started talking about LA and Walker in the Wastes.

Edit: The Ninjas, they are everywhere.

We're awesome like that :smallbiggrin:

[Drakevarg]

If the Undead/(Evil) bypass is really all there is too it, I haven't much to worry about. It's pretty easy to make a house rule that says "Creatures with the Evil subtype have effective corruption and depravity scores equal to one-half their Charisma score +2 for the purposes of qualifying for feats and Prestige Classes, but are immune to taint beyond this." (Meaning their taint score can't get any higher than that.)

As for undead, I rule that most undead in my settings - with the notable exception of Ghouls and Vampires - are not inherently evil and therefore have no inherent link to taint (meaning they suffer from its effects like everything else). Ghouls and Vampires would just get the (Evil) subtype and work with the above rule.

[dextercorvia]

As was mentioned in the other thread, you can fairly easily get a Taint score in the 40s or so without resorting to being Undead/[Evil].

And, you are kinda saying, I don't see why everyone says it's so bad, because I have this houserule....

[NoldorForce]

First off, the limit to the taint you can take before dying or otherwise becoming an NPC scales roughly (due to high granularity) at a rate of 3.5x with the appropriate ability score. (Constitution for corruption and Wisdom for depravity, recall.) Second, your taint scores effectively replace whichever base ability score you're using for spellcasting (corruption grants bonus spells, depravity grants DC boosts). So despite the fact that you're mildly MAD, you can still do a lot better than an equivalent SAD full caster.

Suppose, as a low-op example, you've used decent base values and +6 enhancement magic items to boost your Constitution and Wisdom to 18. Suppose further that you're level 20, to show off the power of bonus spells. So your corruption and depravity scores, so long as they're under 70, are fine.

Suppose that both are merely 50 - after all, every time you cast an arcane spell (for you, ANY spell), you have a chance of picking up more depravity. Then you've got bonus spells appropriate for an ability score of 60, which means five bonus spells (each!) of 6th through 9th levels, and even more for lower spell levels. Meanwhile a mid-op SAD counterpart would have one or two bonus 9th level spells. Additionally, half your depravity score is 25, so all your spell DCs will be 35 + spell level. Again, a mid-op SAD counterpart is casting at between 20 and 25 + spell level.

And that's just with low optimization. With more effort, you can boost your Constitution and Wisdom higher, grabbing yourself at least ten to twenty more points of each kind of taint. You can ignore the negative effects of taint by being undead or having the Evil subtype, but that's a questionable bit of rules territory because (depending on your reading) you might be stuck with low fixed taint scores.

Yes, I've been beaten to the punch, but hopefully I've provided more detail. In summary, don't allow it.

[Drakevarg]

So basically whoever wrote the thing didn't realize just how high taint could get before snapping your soul over its knee.

That IS pretty damn terrible when you stop to consider it. The (Evil) = infinite cheese problem is easy to fix, but the root of the problem kinda exists in the basic concept.

[dextercorvia]

So basically whoever wrote the thing didn't realize just how high taint could get before snapping your soul over its knee.

That IS pretty damn terrible when you stop to consider it. The (Evil) = infinite cheese problem is easy to fix, but the root of the problem kinda exists in the basic concept.

The Taint rules on d20srd are much more restrictive -- pretty much to the point of being just negatives.

[NoldorForce]

The Taint rules on d20srd are much more restrictive -- pretty much to the point of being just negatives.And even then, undead and Evil creatures still get to ignore those penalties without having the restrictions of fixed scores.

[Mystic Muse]

So basically whoever wrote the thing didn't realize just how high taint could get before snapping your soul over its knee.


This is pretty much the problem with the entirety of 3.5. WoTC not considering how easy it was to break something given other sources.

Which reminds me, when I make my monster classes, I need to start putting a big disclaimer at the top stating they were only created with the SRD in mind. Excluding stuff specifically mentioned for an option or two.

[tyckspoon]

The Taint rules on d20srd are much more restrictive -- pretty much to the point of being just negatives.

For everybody except a Tainted Sorcerer, yes. They no longer suffer the Con portion of UA's taint rules and only take half the Wisdom; a UA Tainted Sorcerer can still pretty easily run up a taint score of 30 or so, giving an effective score for bonus spells of 40 and save DCs in the 40-50 range depending on spell level. It's not really better than Heroes of Horror taint in that regard, and at least the HoH version lets you use taint without really screwing everybody who isn't a Tainted Whatever. (Oh, and a benefit for the UA dude: he doesn't have to even go to the trouble of seeking out a source of Corruption. UA just has Taint, and he gets that for casting.)

[Ryu_Bonkosi]

Also you gain an extra point of taint for casting spells, meaning an extra spell per day for every two arcane spells you cast. That in itself is crazy. Self generating extra spell slots. *shudder*

[ShneekeyTheLost]

So there you have it. Your casting stat is based on your Taint, which you ignore if you are Undead or Evil subtype, both of which are pathetically easy to get.

So now you can boost your effective casting stat arbitrarily high, going recursive as you end up gaining more spell slots every other time you cast a spell (and after effective casting stat 20, you are gaining, at a minimum, 2 spell slots for every two stat boosts).

Yea, it really is that broken.

[Ryu_Bonkosi]

Cast cantrips for infinate POWAH!

[Greenish]

This is pretty much the problem with the entirety of 3.5. WoTC not considering how easy it was to break something given other sources.Except of course that Tainted Scholar doesn't need any extra sources to be broken.

[Mystic Muse]

Except of course that Tainted Scholar doesn't need any extra sources to be broken.

True. I guess I should say "WoTC not considering how easy it is to break things with the same book they're in, or even just the core 3."

[Drakevarg]

True. I guess I should say "WoTC not considering how easy it is to break things with the same book they're in, or even just the core 3."

It's kind of baffling how many of these problems could be fixed, though, if they simply had a team of a dozen or so bored nerds to look over new content before it was published.

[Fouredged Sword]

It is called betatesting. I am supprised that WoTC dosen't do it. All it takes is a few DNA until post release forms and you can get a small army of nerds to try to break the system for free.

[Ryu_Bonkosi]

It is called betatesting. I am supprised that WoTC dosen't do it. All it takes is a few DNA until post release forms and you can get a small army of nerds to try to break the system for free.

And we do it gladly.

[Keld Denar]

And one of the biggest gripes about Pathfinder that I've heard is that they released beta, the CharOp community found a bunch of exploits and imbalances in it, and then ALL OF THEM FREAKIN MADE IT INTO FINAL RELEASE.

[Starbuck_II]

And one of the biggest gripes about Pathfinder that I've heard is that they released beta, the CharOp community found a bunch of exploits and imbalances in it, and then ALL OF THEM FREAKIN MADE IT INTO FINAL RELEASE.

No, it is only 70% of them made into Final. :smallbiggrin:

[NoldorForce]

It's kind of baffling how many of these problems could be fixed, though, if they simply had a team of a dozen or so bored nerds to look over new content before it was published.If I recall correctly some 339 folks offered to do exactly that, subject (of course) to NDAs. WotC passed on this, but did solicit help when constructing the Rules Compendium.

On a different note, the original publication of the Swiftblade was so bad and unfocused (like the monk) that 339 took it apart and started fixing it. WotC noticed and explicitly requested help on making an updated version.
Special thanks to Tom Welsh (NineInchNall) and the Character Optimization forum for providing an abundance of useful feedback.